The Nationalist Voice

australia refugees

Just as there is not one Middle East country that will create a Palestinian state for the Palestinians, no Muslim country willing to greet them with open arms and a pot of gold, Australia has for years been trying to pawn off their illegals housed in concentration camps on the island of Papua New Guinea – and surprise – no one wants them! Including Australia.

No one seems deterred by this hypocritical revelation, despite the fact that Australia is governed by a very Liberal government who simply don’t want the riff-raff responsibility.

Australia boasts that its net migration is roughly 178,000. But the editing doesn’t reveal that the vast majority are highly skilled workers. Even for skilled migrants the rules are stiff with an age cap of 50. While Australia claims to have available upwards of 16,000 visa’s for refugees, their actual acceptance rate is about 6000 per year. Strict health and character assessments are in place to determine whether a person is eligible.

Still, despite these minimal queues, despite the concentration camps where refugees have been languishing for years, Australia has the audacity to promote an ad wherein Trump is slammed and ridiculed for his Build The Wall policy. The ad was sponsored by a libertarian group based in the US with Chapters throughout the world, wearechange.org, and headed by Luke Rudkowski.

Libertarians believe that the way to curb immigration is through our welfare system, as in stop offering illegals benefits and they’ll stop coming here. While it is true that illegals follow the money like everyone else, look at Socialist Germany and Sweden, walls do work, and history is a lesson. But I agree that working in conjunction is a necessary deterrent and the overall savings will be extensive.

The numbers are mixed. Despite Ron Paul claiming the Bush fence/wall in Texas was worthless, Federal data suggests it curbed illegal crossing by as much as 89% over the five year period during which it was built. In addition, the Director for Research at the Center for Immigration Studies, has concluded that the savings isn’t a simple immediate welfare cost scenario, but includes the cost of illegal children obtaining US status and rights therein, including healthcare, food stamps and education.

Ron Paul proposes eliminating Federal Welfare entirely. While that may sound like a plan on the surface, in reality it would never pass Congress and is therefore a useless solution.

Even Liberal Germany built a wall in Munich which surrounds a migrant encampment and was commissioned by locals to ‘protect’ those in the outlying neighborhood.

Why are walls so vilified? They have been a part of our global structure since the beginning of time.

Deterrents claim there is a psychological price and a humanitarian duty to take care of everyone. But what if instead of simply allowing unlimited immigration, contries pooled their funds and resources to make the corrupted, crime riddled countries safe? Oh, that’s right, we already do – it’s called the UN.

“The duties of United Nations are numerous like providing cooperation in international law, international security, development of economy, social progress, human rights, and peace in the world”

How’s that working for ya? Obviously, it’s not. In fact, it has failed miserably on every front despite a transparent budgetof … oh, that’s right, it’s not transparent, nor does any country have the right to designate what their funds should be spent on, this is determined by the General Assembly. All 193 members of the General Assembly have an equally weighted vote, without consideration of their funding.

According to the UN, El Salvador is clearly on its way in its sustainable development program which is characterized by its comprehensive and inclusive program. The UN continues to implement and follow-up on El Salvador’s goals in its development program…

Honduras too has a UN Development Program in place which is monitored and guided by UN officials in collaboration with the government to increase food security, drinking water, education, modernization and development…

“Mexico has taken the decision to participate in U.N. peacekeeping missions, taking part in humanitarian tasks that benefit civil society”.

Given these are the three main countries that contribute to the illegal immigration to the US, it would appear that the UN missions are not reflective of the mass exodus. The UN has stated that illegal immigrants from these countries should be designated as ‘refugees’, instead of illegal immigrants thus giving them protective status. Gangs have taken over many of these countries, they have become the ruling drug lords, the mafia, and the over-lords. The situation in these countries is worse than ever – despite UN peacekeeping, UN humanitarian efforts, UN aid, UN, social progress, UN security and UN law.

Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the UN is that they provide aid in the form of food – but it is delivered to the hands of the corrupt government to distribute, the same corrupt government that caused the crisis in the first place.

Even more topsy-turvy, El Salvador ‘sends peacekeepers’ to other countries, despite their internal chaos. So while El Salvador is rated a refugee state by the UN, they send El Salvador peacekeepers to help in Mali and Haiti. The logic is – well – illogical.

Building a wall, we only follow the security measures imposed by over 65 countries across the globe. Is it a psychological ploy to compare a Mexican border wall with the Berlin Wall, as though no other walls have existed. The Berlin Wall was done to encamp people and deny them freedom. There was no intent of ‘protection’, it was a jail. End of comparison.

Humanitarian? It means that immigrants will follow the rules of law and request permission to immigrate – just as they are required to do in most countries – especially in one of the strictest – Australia. End of humanitarian guilt.

The Australian refugee deal was initially agreed to by Obama and Turnbull well before Trump’s election according to Turnbull. It was done covertly, without consent, and without the knowledge of the people. Why? Because it was deemed “classified”.

And although Turnbull claims it was done before the election, he voiced concerns that Trump would not honor it. Which begs the question, did he assume Trump would be elected?

At any rate, Turnbull had already indicated that the ‘deal’ could be dismantled by Trump, which gives insight into a shady agreement that benefited who? And shouldn’t the American people be privy to ‘deals’ that we ultimately pay for and are subjected to?

November 2016, the Washington Times reported that we would be potentially admitting to the US 2400 refugees/ terrorists from Somalia, Iran and Syria.

Of course the question begs, WHY? Why would we want Australia’s refugees? Because Australia doesn’t want them, has detained them in squalid conditions on Papua New Guinea and Nauru, and 370 are in need of medical treatment that Australia doesn’t want to pay for.

So, what is the back story?

Australia has refused any refugees since 2013. Any that arrive by boat illegally are immediately imprisoned on the two above respective islands. And contrary to reports that the inhabitants are mostly women and children, an investigative report highlighted the torture, rape, and beatings imposed by these passive refugees against one another (mostly men) and the 49 children out of 442 prisoners on the island of Nauru. These are the people that Obama agreed to bring to the US. And Turnbull was relieved to be rid of his ‘problem’.

The refugees on Papua New Guinea are no different, ALL men. Many have been detained there for more than three years, which would indicate that the media’s “Limbo” claim as a result of Trump is rather ludicrous given that Trump just assumed office and their plight has been in “Limbo” for over three years.

The Guardian tells the story of a 17 year old Iranian boy sent to the Men’s detention center on Papua New Guinea where he was beaten and raped… these are the men being vetted to come to the US? But his story also highlighted the absolute torture and wrath he was subjected to under the Turnbull regime of “I don’t care”.

New Guinea has pleaded with Turnbull to take the refugees, saying even Australia’s money doesn’t help, and still he refuses. So the ‘deal’ with the US was about Australia’s no refugees allowed policy, not about humanity.

The United Nations Human Rights Division has expressed outrage at the Australian government solution to refugees claiming it was highly illegal.

According to the New York Times, “Australia has turned back boats full of migrants and towed them out to sea; assessed their asylum claims on boats, apparently in violation of international law, before forcing them back; and has even been accused of paying a human trafficker to take his passengers back to Indonesia, where he was arrested.”

Still, both the Obama administration and the Turnbull administration refused to provide specifics of the deal. If there is something to hide, it is probably because it ain’t good!

Given the deal was rife with illegal and secretive assessments, it is hardly odd that the current administration might be more than a little miffed with its responsibility. As Trump is advised concerning all the nuances of the ‘deal’, hopefully it will then be made public so that The People can make their own assessment and analysis.

But to criticize Trump because a secretive deal was made to bail out Turnbull who was being nagged by the UN for his illegal confinement of refugees, well that’s just absurdity at its finest!